[CreditingKarma]

Curious to hear what Bartok owners think of MQA sound quality. On the Chord threads, they act like MQA is COVID.

That might have something to do with the fact that the chord days are not MQA renderer. I didn't find anything special with MQA when I owned my TT2. The Bartok is a full MQA renderer. I have found that MQA sounds better in this situation. It is still dependent on the mix but with the Bartok I find that the stage and imaging are a bit better with MQA versio s of the songs.

 

[ClicketEKlack]

That might have something to do with the fact that the chord days are not MQA renderer. I didn't find anything special with MQA when I owned my TT2. The Bartok is a full MQA renderer. I have found that MQA sounds better in this situation. It is still dependent on the mix but with the Bartok I find that the stage and imaging are a bit better with MQA versio s of the songs.

Cool. Thanks for the feedback. I suspect that the Chord folks are keen to totally discredit the MQA option, as they have been denied it. If they admit that it's of any value, then they also have to admit that they're getting short-changed at a premium price.

 

[radnor]

Anyone have experience with mDave VS Bartok... NOT Dave solo but mDave? Does mDave win?

 

[Jon L]

Cool. Thanks for the feedback. I suspect that the Chord folks are keen to totally discredit the MQA option, as they have been denied it. If they admit that it's of any value, then they also have to admit that they're getting short-changed at a premium price.

As music lover, MQA seems to me to belong in the same sad, greedy space as DRM, Apple not selling any lossless download, lossy download only from mainstream recording studios, and Adobe not letting you own your own Photoshop copy.
A bit more neutral, thoughtful discussion on MQA seems to exist here:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mastering-forum/1171365-mqa-discussion-denver-rmaf.html

 

[Articnoise]

What Hi-Fi? is the world's worst audio magazine IMO.

 

[Malcyg]

I suspect that the Chord folks are keen to totally discredit the MQA option, as they have been denied it. If they admit that it's of any value, then they also have to admit that they're getting short-changed at a premium price.

This is the sort of comment that makes this forum such a joy and an education for us all. We are indeed fortunate to be enlightened by your wisdom.

 

[ClicketEKlack]

This is the sort of comment that makes this forum such a joy and an education for us all. We are indeed fortunate to be enlightened by your wisdom.

You are so very welcome. Thank you for your kind words.

 

[adrianm]

Cool. Thanks for the feedback. I suspect that the Chord folks are keen to totally discredit the MQA option, as they have been denied it. If they admit that it's of any value, then they also have to admit that they're getting short-changed at a premium price.

First off, i've been using Tidal exclusively for 6 years now.With a Chord Mojo.
The MQA debacle is far from a Chord folks thing, Rob Watts just seems to share the opinion of many that refused to jump on the bandwagon, the general consensus nowadays is that it is lossy. Sure some MQA stuff sounds better than the flac files, i attribute that to mastering. Seeing how Tidal is investigated for embezzlement this MQA being lossy is just a drop in a bucket compared to other things they do.
What premium price? Half the cost of the Bartok? you can just add full MQA decoding after with a dedicated streamer if you really think that makes so much of a difference. And still have money left for an M-scaler.
I'm going to keep using Tidal once i get my DAVE. Pretty soon Amazon Music Ultra HD will blow everyone out of the water anyway and MQA will go the way of SACD. I was seriously considering the Bartok but i can't justify the price difference, even though it is nicer to look at .
Don't get hung up on minor specs,especially infamous ones such as MQA. If you want to get the Bartok get it for what it is, not for jumping on the gimmick bandwagon.
Sony, a company a lot bigger than DCS, with an even bigger cult following in Asia, went as far as to advertise using "Kimber Kable " for internal wiring on their 10k walkman. I assure you that's only because of Kimber's popularity with audiophiles. I hardly think DCS is above it.

 

[adrianm]

What Hi-Fi? is the world's worst audio magazine IMO.

Well DCS seems to disagree. They're advertising the review on their front page.

 

[ClicketEKlack]

First off, i've been using Tidal exclusively for 6 years now.With a Chord Mojo.
The MQA debacle is far from a Chord folks thing, Rob Watts just seems to share the opinion of many that refused to jump on the bandwagon, the general consensus nowadays is that it is lossy. Sure some MQA stuff sounds better than the flac files, i attribute that to mastering. Seeing how Tidal is investigated for embezzlement this MQA being lossy is just a drop in a bucket compared to other things they do.
What premium price? Half the cost of the Bartok? you can just add full MQA decoding after with a dedicated streamer if you really think that makes so much of a difference. And still have money left for an M-scaler.
I'm going to keep using Tidal once i get my DAVE. Pretty soon Amazon Music Ultra HD will blow everyone out of the water anyway and MQA will go the way of SACD. I was seriously considering the Bartok but i can't justify the price difference, even though it is nicer to look at .
Don't get hung up on minor specs,especially infamous ones such as MQA. If you want to get the Bartok get it for what it is, not for jumping on the gimmick bandwagon.
Sony, a company a lot bigger than DCS, with an even bigger cult following in Asia, went as far as to advertise using "Kimber Kable " for internal wiring on their 10k walkman. I assure you that's only because of Kimber's popularity with audiophiles. I hardly think DCS is above it.

Fair enough. Good points all.

 

[adrianm]

Fair enough. Good points all.

Thanks, hope it didn't come off as me bashing on DCS. Nowadays just having a good product isn't enough sadly, you need to check the buzzwords if you want commercial success.

 

[adrianm]

I am curious how the Bartok would compare to a Gold Note DS-10, it seems like the closest competitor as far as streaming dacs are concerned. They only compare it to the Rossini here :
https://www.stereophile.com/content/gold-note-ds-10-da-processor

 

[ubs28]

Curious to hear what Bartok owners think of MQA sound quality. On the Chord threads, they act like MQA is COVID.

I have Tidal again for a couple of days. And I hear a clear difference between "real" high resolution music (that I have locally) and MQA. I also have software which can do MQA decoding, so it is not a Chord problem.

To be honest, Tidal is being fraudulent because Master quality which artists send to mastering studio is often in .wav format. And MQA is nothing like .wav audio quality.

Tidal should stop being cheap and offer their music in real high-resolution format like Qobuz if they want to keep claiming "Master quality".

 

[Articnoise]

Well DCS seems to disagree. They're advertising the review on their front page.

Maybe DCS loves the magazine What Hi-Fi? Does it also mean that I have to like it too ?

Does a manufacturer need to like the magazine to use their review in advertising?

 

[CreditingKarma]

Anyone have experience with mDave VS Bartok... NOT Dave solo but mDave? Does mDave win?

I auditioned the mDave combo against the Bartok and MSB premire. I put up the comparison in the Chord threads. The short version is that I preferred the MSB AND Bartok over the mDave and Dave. I found that the mDave brought a bit of a harsh edge to the sound in the treble area. I prefer the Dave without the mScaler.

This might also come down to the speakers and headphones that you have. I have Abyss TC and magico speakers that are both detailed and very transparent. With warmer sounding transducers your mileage might vary.